re: Why does Fox have such a bad HD signal?

Fox is 720p which is 1280x720 and I guess people’s larger 4K TVs are starting to show the bad choice of broadcasting in that format.

Until ASTC 3.0 comes out and stations start broadcasting in 4K, there will always be a theoretical limit to how good a broadcast signal can be. Also, local stations are trying to expand their broadcast realms with multiple sub channels. FOX 8 in Nola has 3 other stations in addition to the Fox feed.

Just be lucky you don’t live in a market where the Fox station is a sub channel of a major station. I can’t even to image how compressed that shite could be.

Each broadcast station can transmit 19.4 Mbps of data in ASTC 2.0 (the current standard), with ASTC 3.0 this is much higher and can be as much 57 Mbps depending on their broadcast stream. They can also use newer HEVC codecs for higher quality streams at lower bit rates.

quote:

---

Fox is 720p which is 1280x720 and I guess people’s larger 4K TVs are starting to show the bad choice of broadcasting in that format.

---

Fox (and ESPN) chose 720p for its theoretical (and actual) benefit over 1080i for live sports. While its lower pixel density shows up on larger UHD/4K displays it does not account for the choppy picture Fox often displays. Any channel you find that has a less than stellar picture you can be sure the issue is compression somewhere upstream from you (unless you have seriously subpar equipment yourself). There was a time when bandwidth was costly enough for this to be understandable, at this point it is not.

quote:

---

Fox is 720p which is 1280x720 and I guess people’s larger 4K TVs are starting to show the bad choice of broadcasting in that format.

---

Not sure if still true, but ABC and ESPN used to use 720p as well. Originally 720p especially with 60 fps was thought to be better for sports than 1080i, but over time with I don’t think that stayed as true in practice and those using 720p also didn’t seem use 60fps consistently. Not sure if 1080p over the air would have worked with all tuners from the start, but Most over air broadcasters didn’t want to give up bandwidth the use for extra channels to broadcast in 1080p anyway (and never required to use 1080p).

quote:

---

Each broadcast station can transmit 19.4 Mbps of data in ASTC 2.0 (the current standard), with ASTC 3.0 this is much higher and can be as much 57 Mbps depending on their broadcast stream. They can also use newer HEVC codecs for higher quality streams at lower bit rates.

---

I thought 2.0 as a standard was never officially rolled out as it was going to be outdated before it could be. I know it was backward compatible so maybe it was voluntarily down by many.

3.0 is not backward compatible and has had final FCC rules in place since March 2018, but 3.0 is voluntary for now and those stations doing it have to still put out the 1.0 signal for 5 years without getting extra bandwidth. They are supposed to cooperate with other local stations and share. I don’t hear that much about stations plans for this.

3.0 Broadcast signals are also supposed to be better matched with internet services and switching to OFDM will better allow moving devices to receive a signal.

“ An ATSC 3.0 tuner will have two connections: One to your antenna, and another — either via Wi-Fi or Ethernet — to your Wi-Fi router. The benefit here is that you’ll only ever need one antenna in your home, since other set-top boxes, smart TVs, and mobile devices in your home will receive the TV signals over Wi-Fi. ”

https://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/atsc-3-0-ota-broadcast-standard-4k-dolby-atmos/


Article is from before final rules but also goes over internet protocols and other stuff.
https://www.theverge.com/2017/2/2/14488608/4k-tv-broadcasts-ajit-pai-atsc-3-hdr

Tax cuts have hurt state-run TV

quote:

---

Tax cuts have hurt state-run TV

---

I beg to differ.

Some of these stations/station groups cashed out mightily in the incentive auction to give up their frequencies for cellular services in the larger markets. (None of which happened in our local markets.)


But some can cash in on relocation costs with new transmitters and antennas.

quote:

---

quote: I’ve always been told is the BR fox affiliate who’s fricking the signal up. Lafayette as well

---

Lafayette is bad because they are squeezing an NBC 1080i signal along with a 720p Fox signal and one 480i MyNetwork Affiliate. They are running that crap at a variable bit rate at 6-8.5 Mbps in HD for NBC and Fox.

I forgot mention at some point in our lovely discussion of Fox stations is that at some point in the past, Fox had a propriety splicing system at the affiliates where the network was in control of things like the bit rate. Stations would supply a signal to the splicer for commercials, off network programming, and sub channels.

It was supposed to help the stations maintain better quality signal so that it could prioritize Fox programming for things like football and give it more bandwidth and sacrifice and squeeze the other sub channels more, but most stations must have found a way to cheat that system.

I can recall one day using a big dish and receiving the NBC Network feed on C-band or KU. It wasn’t football, but it was so much nicer than the crap that WDSU puts out.

At some point in a TV discussion, some one should point out that most terrestrial TV broadcasts use MPEG 2 compression which is pretty old and somewhat outdated for low bit rate environments while on the back end satellite world everything is evolving to or already MPEG 4.

ESPN may stay in that MPEG4 compression state for its entire broadcast chain for services like Directv while Fox has to change at some point to MPEG2.

quote:

---

You could pay for it like most people do and have a clear signal.

---

The signal through rabbit ears is usually better Captain Cable